Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-06
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The graph below shows the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Perceived and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime: by crime type
Student answer (Band 5.0)
The bar graph shows the percentage of precevied and actual likelihood of being a victim in crime from year 2009 to 2011.
The overeall analysis of this graph shows precieved car crime has maximum value in 2009/2010 and actual burglary crime has minimum value in 2009/2010.
Firstly we discuss precieved likelihood in year 2009/2010 has 15% in burglary which increases to 20 % in car crime and then reduces to 15% violent crime.in the same year the actual likelihood has little greater than 0% in burglary crime and increases to little less than 5% in car crime and then reduces to in between 5% in violent crimes.
secondly we discuss precieved likelihood in year 2010 to 2011 which has little less than 15% in burglary which increases to little greater than 15% in car crime which reduces to same in violent crime as burglary. in the same year actual likelihood has little greater than 0% in burglary crime which increases to little less than 5% in car crimes and in violent crimews are similar as burglary crime.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0
The response addresses the task only partially. While the student attempts to summarise the main features of the chart, the selection of data is incomplete and contains inaccuracies. For instance, the overview provided in the second sentence is confusing and fails to clearly highlight the most striking general trends, such as the consistent gap between perceived and actual crime rates. Furthermore, specific figures are misreported or vaguely expressed, stating that violent crime in 2009/2010 reduces to 'in between 5%' when the actual value is 3%. Ideas are limited and under-developed, lacking a fully realised overview and a thorough comparison across all categories.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5
There is some organisation in the response, but it lacks a clear overall progression. The essay is divided into an introduction, an overview, and two body paragraphs, which is an appropriate structural attempt; however, the transitions between sentences feel mechanical and repetitive, relying heavily on formulas like 'Firstly we discuss' and 'secondly we discuss'. Referencing is also occasionally unclear, making it difficult to follow the logical flow of comparisons between the years and crime types. Paragraphing could be used more purposefully to separate distinct ideas rather than grouping multiple years and data points into dense, run-on blocks.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is limited and barely adequate for the task, with noticeable errors that occasionally impede communication. There are multiple spelling and word-choice errors, such as 'precevied' instead of perceived, 'overeall', and 'crimews'. The range of vocabulary is restricted, and attempts to use less common terms result in frequent lexical inaccuracies and awkward collocations. To improve to a higher band, the student needs to expand their vocabulary related to data trends and ensure accurate spelling and word formation throughout the response.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The writer demonstrates a very limited range of sentence structures, relying mostly on simple or poorly constructed complex sentences. There are frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, and prepositions that can cause difficulty for the reader, such as missing articles ('in crime' instead of 'of crime') and awkward verb phrases like 'which reduces to same in violent crime as burglary'. Complex structures, when attempted, are often faulty and lack control over subject-verb agreement and clause connection. Frequent errors persist and hinder the overall clarity of the grammatical delivery.
See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.
Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.